Wednesday, March 30, 2011

For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty. When the company was suddenly pinned down by a hail of extremely accurate enemy fire and was quickly separated from the remainder of the battalion by over 500 meters of open and fire-swept ground, and casualties mounted rapidly. Lt. Barnum quickly made a hazardous reconnaissance of the area, seeking targets for his artillery. Finding the rifle company commander mortally wounded and the radio operator killed, he, with complete disregard for his safety, gave aid to the dying commander, then removed the radio from the dead operator and strapped it to himself. He immediately assumed command of the rifle company, and moving at once into the midst of the heavy fire, rallying and giving encouragement to all units, reorganized them to replace the loss of key personnel and led their attack on enemy positions from which deadly fire continued to come. His sound and swift decisions and his obvious calm served to stabilize the badly decimated units and his gallant example as he stood exposed repeatedly to point out targets served as an inspiration to all. Provided with 2 armed helicopters, he moved fearlessly through enemy fire to control the air attack against the firmly entrenched enemy while skillfully directing 1 platoon in a successful counterattack on the key enemy positions. Having thus cleared a small area, he requested and directed the landing of 2 transport helicopters for the evacuation of the dead and wounded. He then assisted in the mopping up and final seizure of the battalion's objective. His gallant initiative and heroic conduct reflected great credit upon himself and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the U.S. Naval Service.

There are fewer than a hundred living MoH recipients today. Their names and their stories should not be forgotten. My mission is to honor one of those heroes here each week, and salute them for their courage and sacrifice. In the words of John Fitzgerald Kennedy:

“A nation reveals itself not only by the men it produces, but also by the men it honors; the men it remembers.”

Being that the lamestream press is is so ragingly incompetent, leftist and corrupt, they clearly don't get what he is up to, which his simple: He has picked the most controversial, headline-grabbing topic to push that promotes his name and brand and makes the press look even stupider than they are. Let's face it, Trump touting a flat tax plan would not have as many people talking as the birther issue does.

And I am almost 100% certain that he is not serious about running for the Presidency of the United States, he's just promoting himself and his brand.

...headline from local paper. I guess I wasn't the only one to notice! Maybe we could call it "Obama's Old Mother Hubbard* speech"? Except, what would differentiate it from all the others?

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama sent a signal to the country and the world Monday night about his decision to attack Libya: There is no "Obama doctrine" here.

Obama used his evening speech to assure skeptical Americans that he was forced to act by a madman in unique circumstances, that the U.S. role and risk would be limited, and that there is no unifying set of principles behind the Libya campaign that would guide the U.S. in other countries with similar problems.

Try as he might, Obama could not convince most people that a violation of American "values" constituted a threat to American security interests.

Ultimately, Obama said, his actions in Libya are a case study in pragmatism, not a doctrine. It depends on circumstances, he said.

"It is true that America cannot use our military wherever repression occurs," he said. "But that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what's right."

Which is, of course, a straw man, for the opposite of not taking action in a particular case is not "never taking action".

The President set forth no governing principle to guide us, merely a string of platitudes stitched together with rhetorical sleight of hand.

*Old Mother HubbardWent to the cupboardTo get her poor dog a bone;But when she got thereThe cupboard was bare,And so the poor dog** had none.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

As bad as Mubarak and Qaddafi have been, one of the things that have bothered me about this administration's rush to remove Egyptian and Libyan dictators, is the uncertainty of who or what would be replacing them. I believe that part of the reticence to take out Saddam during the first Gulf War, was not knowing who would fill the vacuum of his passing. Better the devil you know...

And now, it appears that some of the "rebels" in Libya have Al-Qaeda connections. What's to prevent a radical Muslim takeover or either Egypt or Libya (or both)? The terrorist group Hamas was "democratically" elected to govern the Gaza strip. Merely holding an election is not enough to institute the democratic reforms needed to sustain a Jeffersonian democracy (or a democratic republic, if you will.)

What if a coalition of the great nations had intervened on behalf of our rebels a hundred and fifty years ago? Since there is a possibility of us backing the "wrong rebels", I offer the following:

Dateline Paris, 1862:

Tonight, I’d like to update the French people on the international effort that we have led in the United States –- what we’ve done, what we plan to do, and why this matters to us.

I want to begin by paying tribute to our men and women in uniform who, once again, have acted with courage, professionalism and patriotism. They have moved with incredible speed and strength. Because of them and our dedicated diplomats, a coalition has been forged and countless lives have been saved.

Meanwhile, as we speak, our troops are also fighting in Mexico. For generations, France has played a unique role as an anchor of global security and as an advocate for human freedom. Mindful of the risks and costs of military action, we are naturally reluctant to use force to solve the world’s many challenges. But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act. That’s what happened in the United States over the course of these last six weeks.

The American people are been ruled by Abraham Lincoln, who has denied his people freedom and exploited their wealth. He began attacking and killing his own people. I made it clear that Lincoln had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and I said that he needed to step down from power.

Confronted by this brutal repression and a looming humanitarian crisis, I ordered warships into American waters. European allies, Britain and Spain declared their willingness to commit resources to stop the killing. We have instituted a blockade...a "no float zone" if you will, outside northern American ports.

We struck regime forces approaching Atlanta to save that city and the people within it. We targeted military assets that had been choking off towns and cities, and we cut off much of their source of supply.

It’s true that France cannot use our military wherever repression occurs. And given the costs and risks of intervention, we must always measure our interests against the need for action. But that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what’s right. In this particular country -– the United States — at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale. More Americans have died during this conflict than at any other time in their history.

I believe that this movement of change cannot be turned back, and that we must stand alongside those who believe in the same core principles that have guided us through many storms: our opposition to violence directed at one’s own people; our support for a set of universal rights, including the freedom for people to express themselves and choose their leaders; our support for governments that are ultimately responsive to the aspirations of the people.

For these reasons and more, we support Jefferson Davis and those "rebels" and their adherence to the right of self determination.

Thank you. God bless you, and may God bless the newly formed Confederate States of America.

Monday, March 28, 2011

Attention: All you folk that want to carp about Bush's "unpaid for" wars, listen up!

One week after an international military coalition intervened in Libya, the cost to U.S. taxpayers has reached at least $600 million, according figures provided by the Pentagon. U.S. ships and submarines in the Mediterranean have launched at least 191 Tomahawk cruise missiles from their arsenals, costing $268.8 million, the Pentagon said.

One point four million per cruise missile. They were about a million when Clinton wagged the dog over the chubby intern.

U.S. warplanes have dropped 455 precision guided bombs, costing tens of thousands of dollars each. A downed Air Force F-15E fighter jet will cost more than $60 million to replace. And operation of ships and aircraft, guzzling ever-more-expensive fuel to maintain their positions off the Libyan coast and in the skies above, could reach millions of dollars a week, experts say.

...The three B-2 stealth bombers that flew from Missouri to Libya and back on an early bombing mission each cost an estimated $10,000 per hour to fly, a defense official said. That means the planes, each on a 25-hour round-trip flight, ran up a bill of $750,000, and the 45 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) they dropped added at least $1.3 million more.

Cruise missile? $1.4 million.

F-15? $31 Million

Mind numbing hypocrisy over intervening in a country that did not attack us nor posed no imminent threat to us?

(Gaddafi) has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorized innocent people around the world

This makes him different from Saddam Hussein, how exactly?

...We then took a series of swift steps in a matter of days to answer Gaddafi's aggression. We froze more than $33 billion of the Gaddafi regime's assets.

And the fact that he has 14 tons of gold at his fingertips means that the freeze would not be as crippling as one might hope.

Joining with other nations at the United Nations Security Council, we broadened our sanctions, imposed an arms embargo, and enabled Gaddafi and those around him to be held accountable for their crimes. I made it clear that Gaddafi had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and I said that he needed to step down from power.

Big whoop. If any other world leader looked at Obama's poll numbers and told him the same thing, any guesses as to what his reaction would be? Where are all the "We're not the cops of the world" Leftists to protest Obama intervening in the internal affairs of a sovereign country?

We knew that if we waited one more day, Benghazi – a city nearly the size of Charlotte – could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world. It was not in our national interest to let that happen

People dying in Dafur...does that not "stain the conscience of the world"? What does "staining the conscience of the world" have to do with the national security of the US?

...In this effort, the United States has not acted alone. Instead, we have been joined by a strong and growing coalition.

Oh, like the one G.W. Bush build before going into Iraq? Well, his was bigger! Again, how does this differ, other than the hypocrisy of the players, between Libya and Iraq?

...in just one month, the United States has worked with our international partners to mobilize a broad coalition, secure an international mandate to protect civilians, stop an advancing army, prevent a massacre, and establish a No Fly Zone with our allies and partners.

And Bush took five months after receiving Congressional approval and all the mindless minions of the Left chided him for "rushing" into war. I'm sure we'll hear the same complaint from the same voices any minute now? (Crickets chirp.)

...I said that America's role would be limited; that we would not put ground troops into Libya; that we would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation, and that we would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners. Tonight, we are fulfilling that pledge.

Translation from Obamaspeak: We will commit an act of war against a sovereign nation by firing missiles at them, without a proper consultation of the Congress of the United States. Plus, with the left bleating about the two wars Bush "didn't pay for", Obama launched $100+ million dollars worth of cruise missiles to begin an action AP estimates will cost upwards of one billion dollars. (That's "billion" with a "B".)

...We will safeguard the more than $33 billion that was frozen from the Gaddafi regime so that it is available to rebuild Libya. After all, this money does not belong to Gaddafi or to us – it belongs to the Libyan people, and we will make sure they receive it.

Oh, really? Did we ever "safeguard the billions" that belonged to the Palestinian people that Arafat siphoned off? And his Constitutional authority for redistributing Libyan wealth is found where exactly? I guess when he told Joe the Plumber he would "spread the wealth", he wasn't just talking about American wealth!

In this particular country – Libya; at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale. We had a unique ability to stop that violence: an international mandate for action, a broad coalition prepared to join us, the support of Arab countries, and a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves.

Again, this differs from Iraq...how? Oh, yeah. We have a Democrat in the White House!

To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and – more profoundly – our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.

Since CNN was hiding the images of mass graves in Iraq, I guess you didn't see them? And when Saddam gassed his own people or created the horrendous ecological disaster, by draining nearly 7,000 square miles of wetlands to punish the marsh Arabs living there, I guess there were no images of that, either. Neither of those rise to the "staining the conscience of the world" status, Mr. Obama?

...There will be times, though, when our safety is not directly threatened, but our interests and values are. Sometimes, the course of history poses challenges that threaten our common humanity and common security – responding to natural disasters, for example; or preventing genocide and keeping the peace; ensuring regional security, and maintaining the flow of commerce. These may not be America's problems alone, but they are important to us, and they are problems worth solving. And in these circumstances, we know that the United States, as the world's most powerful nation, will often be called upon to help.

Our values haven't been threatened in Darfur? In Iran?? Rwanda??? Obama's rhetorical obfuscation and doublespeak did not answer any of the questions about what he and Biden (and most of the Left) articulated about the Iraqi conflict. He did not address the fact that if fighting two wars strains the military and busts the budget, how there is a compelling interest in fighting a third, where American security interests are not directly threatened?

I think the Obama Doctrine needs to be defined somewhat beyond, "Because I said so".

It's that time of year again! The third blogiversary of Proof Positive. A little "inside baseball": This time last year, there were about 2,600 posts , and 37,000 hits from 114 countries around the globe. Nine days after I started, I added the widget from Sitemeter, which started off at about three hits a day (and one of them was me!).

Today, over 4200 posts, with 154,000+ hits from 169 countries, averaging around a three hundred or so hits a day. I'd like to think that some of that growth is because of the content, provided by members of "Team Proof", some because of the "kindness of strangers" linking from some great blogs and some mighty fine looking women, occasionally featured on these pages. (Stacy McCain's Rule Five)

For those of you who visit on a regular basis, I thank you for the time you spend here, whether contemplating the deep mysteries of life or just laughing as we poke fun at the foibles of fools. For those of you who were just suckered in, er, enticed by a headline or photograph, I am grateful to you, too, and hope that once you stumble in here, you stay a while and take a look around.

I ultimately take credit and/or blame for everything that appears here. To make this something you enjoy reading, I first make it something I would. Not everything here is meant to be earth shattering or profound, sometimes it's just funny, or interesting to me. And there's at least some new content everyday for non subscribers. (Subscribers sit with me on the beach, sipping rum drinks at Hanauma Bay. Subscription price To Be Determined.)

It's been a great three years. I have been joined by some outstanding bloggers, to entertain, enlighten and inform you, and I am looking forward to more great things in the coming year, running up to the election in 2012. I propose we take back our country, and do it in style!

Sigh. Every time you think the culture has hit rock bottom, someone starts digging again!

Seven years old is not the time for any child to be thinking about sexuality. Seven is a time for Dora the Explorer, not Debbie Does Dallas. What possible benefit could a seven year old girl have in being found more sexually attractive to either men and boys who are ready to act on such urges, or even to those who do not?

Gail Dines, a sociology professor at Wheelock College in Boston, similarly slammed the top, saying it would encourage girls to think about themselves in a sexual way before they are ready.

"It (also) sends out really bad signals to adult men about young girls being appropriate sexual objects,"

Children grow up fast enough. There's no need to steal their childhood and innocence from them at that age. And any mothers vainly trying to relive their lost glory through their too, too young daughters, should seek counseling, not push up bras for little girls.

...time again to turn on every available light and appliance in your home, barn, garage, workplace and automobile, in an effort to outshine the other two stars in the trinary system. And remember, due to added carbon output, portable generators, and idling road graders, pavers and bulldozers win extra Algore Points based on horsepower and time spent on line. Bonfires will also be awarded Algore Points based on size and the toxicity of fuel.

Light 'em up, people! "if it can’t be seen from space, you’re doing it wrong."

Experience with liberal tactics has taught us that simultaneously claiming two mutually exclusive positions does not represent sloppy thinking at all, but rather a skillful Orwellian method of gaining support for bad policies. This is the way the Left does business.

Friday, March 25, 2011

One of the hallmarks of the Friday Night Babe is five to six of the best shots on earth, of a very beautiful woman.

However, quantity and quality do not always go hand in hand. Sometimes one finds a single, exquisite shot of an extremely attractive woman, but search as one may, four others to match just cannot be found.

So, what if one were to take (at least) five or six of these, one of a kind photos for a rare and unique Babeapalooza?

Just when you think this administration couldn't become more shallow or disingenuous, they come up with something new!

"Kinetic Military Action"... is that like WTF, stands for "Wining the future" with this administration?Because KMA also stands for "Kiss My *ss". Sounds about like the Obama administration's concern for taxpayers and voters.

This is the way a liberal commits an act of war, when he doesn't have enough spine to stand up for what he's done.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life and beyond the call of duty while serving as a HC2c. with Company M, in connection with operations against enemy aggressor forces. During the afternoon hours, Company M was moving to join the remainder of the 3d Battalion in Quang Tri Province. After treating and evacuating 2 heat casualties, HC2c. Ballard was returning to his platoon from the evacuation landing zone when the company was ambushed by a North Vietnamese Army unit employing automatic weapons and mortars, and sustained numerous casualties. Observing a wounded marine, HC2c. Ballard unhesitatingly moved across the fire swept terrain to the injured man and swiftly rendered medical assistance to his comrade. HC2c. Ballard then directed 4 marines to carry the casualty to a position of relative safety. As the 4 men prepared to move the wounded marine, an enemy soldier suddenly left his concealed position and, after hurling a hand grenade which landed near the casualty, commenced firing upon the small group of men. Instantly shouting a warning to the marines, HC2c. Ballard fearlessly threw himself upon the lethal explosive device to protect his comrades from the deadly blast. When the grenade failed to detonate, he calmly arose from his dangerous position and resolutely continued his determined efforts in treating other marine casualties. HC2c. Ballard's heroic actions and selfless concern for the welfare of his companions served to inspire all who observed him and prevented possible injury or death to his fellow marines. His courage, daring initiative, and unwavering devotion to duty in the face of extreme personal danger, sustain and enhance the finest traditions of the U.S. Naval Service.

There are fewer than a hundred living MoH recipients today. Their names and their stories should not be forgotten. My mission is to honor one of those heroes here each week, and salute them for their courage and sacrifice. In the words of John Fitzgerald Kennedy:

“A nation reveals itself not only by the men it produces, but also by the men it honors; the men it remembers.”

*Tensions with Britain as Gates rebukes UK government over suggestion Gaddafi could be assassinated *French propose a new political 'committee' to oversee operations*Germany pulls equipment out of NATO coalition over disagreement over campaign's direction*Italians accuse French of backing NATO in exchange for oil contracts*No-fly zone called into question after first wave of strikes 'neutralises' Libyan military machine*U.K. ministers say war could last '30 years'*Italy to 'take back control' of bases used by allies unless NATO leadership put in charge of the mission*Russians tell U.S. to stop bombing in order to protect civilians - calls bombing a 'crusade'

Ever want to know what your raving-mad Marxist college professor would look/act like in a position of unchecked, banana republic power (no, not Obama, even he has to abide by some semblance of checks and balances)?

Pretty close to Hugo Chavez, me-thinks. Capitalism killed Martians and other assorted goodies:

"I have always said, heard, that it would not be strange that there had been civilization on Mars, but maybe capitalism arrived there, imperialism arrived and finished off the planet," Chavez said in speech to mark World Water Day.

It gets better. Wait for this...drumroll...the war in Libya is motivated by oil and...water:

"Careful! Here on planet Earth where hundreds of years ago or less there were great forests, now there are deserts. Where there were rivers, there are deserts," Chavez said, sipping from a glass of water.

He added that the West's attacks on Libya were about water and oil reserves.

Indeed. There is a lot of water in Libya, I guess this isn't too far fetched:

Is it just me? But, after all these months of T-mobile busting on AT&T, comparing their network as a hip, beautiful babe versus the dorky, balding, middle aged, clueless guy, my idea for their next commercial would be to have the dorky AT&T guy smoking a cigarette, with a big smile on his face, laying next to Miss T-Mobile Hotness in bed.

“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations. They did not consult the United States Congress. They’re creating wreckage, and they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground. … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.”

Monday, March 21, 2011

What is it with Democrats and not paying taxes? Claire McCaskill has never struck me as the sharpest knife in the Democrat drawer, from her lackluster appearances on the Sunday morning shows, but here, she shows the same tin ear most Democrat politicians do when it comes to meeting their civic obligations.

Tom Daschle gets chauffeured around in a limo and "forgets" to pay his fair share of taxes for the privilege. Turbo Tax Timmy Geithner "forgets" to pay his taxes. Claire McCaskill flies around in her own private plane and "forgets" to pay taxes on it (and inappropriately bills some of the expenses to the taxpayer to boot!).

Maybe she's angling for a cabinet position in the Obama administration?

Are you familiar with the old wives' tale that teachers only work nine months a year? Totally not true! At least not in Oshkosh, Wisconsin! There they have 90 days of sick leave, so they only have to work six months a year!

This is not to say that every teacher abuses the system. But the system itself is rife with opportunities for abuse! Can you imagine any profession, other than perhaps, entertainment, where people receive an annual salary for a half a year's work? And what about the expense and harm to the quality of education (stop laughing!) when substitutes have to replace those who are out "sick" for as many as three months?

Public service contracts of every stripe need to be reexamined so that the taxpayer does not end up perpetually making Cadillac payments for Yugo services.

Truth, they say, is stranger than fiction. Who among us could have predicted a year ago, that the man who vowed to get us out of Iraq would not only still be mucking about in Afghanistan, but launch yet another military action, without the advise or consent of Congress, against a country that had not attacked us, in a Middle Eastern nation, ostensibly to depose a dictator who abused and murdered his own people?

Why am I having this odd sense of déjà vu? There are differences, of course. The delays with Bush were in consensus building, not dithering. And Bush led the coalition to depose Saddam, while Obama had to be led to even take a supporting role.

Political campaigns are supposed to be an indication of who a man is and what he will do when elected to office. Wouldn't you think that before taking an action like this, however justified, that was 180 degrees off of his campaign promises, Obama should have at least advised Congress as to what he was about to do, if not put it up for a vote?

It used to be, that whenever a Democrat president fired missiles into a Middle Eastern country, that there was at least a chubby intern involved somehow. Two years into his first, and hopefully only term, people were starting to call Afghanistan "Obama's war". But, now, he has one of his very own.

Since working with Breitbart, my position on political issues hasn’t changed but I’d be lying if I didn’t say I’m deeply disappointed by the virulent, lockstep attitude I see on the left. My experience in the last few months tells me what I would not have believed possible; on any number of issues... I’ve seen liberals act much nastier and with less factual honesty than the conservatives… and this includes on issues where I disagree with conservatives.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Characterize it however you like, but Barack Obama just launched a military offensive against the sovereign state of Libya. Without a declaration of war from Congress.

Let me say up front, I don't have a problem with that. He is the President. Sometimes, Presidents must take swift and decisive action (stop laughing!). And though Obama's actions here have not been all that swift, or all that decisive, at least he has finally done something!

Side note: When the French are leading the military action and America is providing only support, who looks more like the leader of the Free World? Barack Obama or Nicolas Sarkozy?

What I'm wondering now, is whether or not the hypocritical Left (but I repeat myself) will denounce Obama for this in the same way they denounced Bush. They have pretty much given Obama a pass on the continuing war in Afghanistan, even as American casualties rise. (Whatever happened to reciting the names of fallen soldiers on TV, printing them in Doonesbury?) Obama has given de facto blessing to George Bush's Gitmo policy and now, launches a military offense against yet another nation that has, as the Left is wont to say, "not attacked us". (At least, not lately!)

I sincerely hope that the French and the British, with our help, can bring peace and stability to Libya. Maybe even plant the seeds for a fledgling democracy.

And I'd also like to see whether or not all the criticism of George W. Bush was just window dressing, as a means of gaining power for the Left or if there is anyone who will stand on principle on the Left, no matter how misguided.

TRIPOLI, Libya -- The U.S. military has launched its first missiles in Libya against Moammar Gadhafi's forces

TRIPOLI, Libya (CNN) -- The U.S. military has launched its first missiles in Libya against Moammar Gadhafi's forces, a senior Defense Department official said Saturday.

Earlier, French fighter jets deployed over Libya fired at a military vehicle on Saturday, the country's first strike against Moammar Gadhafi's military forces who earlier attacked the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.

The French Defense Ministry, which confirmed the strike, said its attack aircraft being used to take out tanks and artillery have deemed Benghazi and the surrounding area an "exclusion zone."

The French are using surveillance aircraft and two frigates in the operation to protect civilians. The aircraft carrier Charles De Gaulle will soon depart Toulon, France.

"Our air force will oppose any aggression by Colonel Gadhafi against the population of Benghazi," said French President Nicolas Sarkozy, speaking after an international, top-level meeting in Paris over the Libyan crisis.

Look for Code Pink to toss bricks through DNC headquarters windows and Cindy Sheehan to camp outside Obama's golf course, if she can ever figure out which one. Yeah. Right.

Then, thank a Democrat! I know that sounds kind of like a partisan shot, but really! Remember the bilge and blather that Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts have been pumping for years? Gasoline was $2.32/ gallon the day before Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House. She said that the price of gas was too high, and the Democrats were going to change that!

Millions were invested in "green" energy, billions were funneled to ethanol subsidies, tax breaks were taken away from oil companies, all of which were calculated by the Democrats to "help our economy", increase national security, and drive gas prices down. How successful have they been so far?

And the reasons they gave for the "high" gas price of $2.32 (and rising)? One of them that you just don't hear much any more, (wonder why?) is that the President (Bush) was "too cozy" with the oil companies. Remember that one? Well, for more than two years we have had a president who is definitely not "cozy" with big oil companies. (At least, not the ones in this country. Brazil is another story!). If the Democrats weren't totally delusional or lying to us, getting rid of that "cozy" relationship should have, according to them, caused gas prices to go down. How's that working out for them? For you? For the country?

They say the classic sign of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and looking for different results. How much longer are we going to leave energy policy in the hands of those who cannot even properly identify the problem much less offer a sane or rational solution?

A couple of Golden Oldies From Nancy Pelosi and The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight:

The editor of this anthology, who took part and was wounded in the last war to end war, hates war and hates all the politicians whose mismanagement, gullibility, cupidity, selfishness, and ambition brought on this present war and made it inevitable. But once we have a war there is only one thing to do. It must be won. For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in a war.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

This video, which I "liberated" from No Sheeples Here, is not for the faint of heart.You've probably heard of the $105 billion dollar blank check for Obamacare, but you may not have heard all the details. Have paramedics standing by if you haven't!

For information about purchasing his completed art or commissioning new projects, contact him at

john555cox @ hotmail.com. (No spaces)

Blog rated PG-13

KiRKWOOD

The Blog Commandments

I. Commenting here is a privilege, not a right.

II. Disagreement is welcome, even encouraged, but spam, unduly profane, or offensive speech is subject to removal by the staff and management of this blog. Insults from the FBI (Foul mouthed, Boring and Ignorant) and anonymous trolls hardest hit.

III. Feel free to use, in unaltered form, any Photoshops I create with the 'Proof Positive' address on them. A simple link in return is all we ask, so anyone else who likes it knows where to find more.

IV. The artwork that John does is his own, so you should write him for permission to use it.

V. As a matter of policy, I never knowingly print lies or untruths in my blog or Tweets, unless I'm quoting correctly the liberal who told them.

Flag Counter (Since May '09)

Proof Positive Glossary:

Support Democracies Around the World

Support Our Allies Around the World

Support Our Friends Around the World

Casablanca

Fair Use

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, & social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use any copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must first obtain permission from the copyright owner.